A Case for Privatizing the Philadelphia Police Force

September 7,2019

Whether overwhelmed, or just plain handcuffed by current scrutiny, police forces like the one in Philadelphia have more difficulty doing their job today than a few years ago.

I witnessed this first hand when a family member had his car broken into in North Philadelphia, called 9-1-1 and no one showed up. Later, I had the opportunity to talk to the office of a state representative in a part of the city who told me outright the police won't show up unless there is a shooting or violent crime in progress.

I really believe that breaking in someone's window to get at the $40 or $50 inside is a violent act. It's an act that could escalate into further violence if the owner came back and happened to have a gun permit. Aside of this type of vigilanteism, what is the solution to this wide spread problem?

Scrutiny of the police has become an artform in the United States. It's gotten to the point that, you cannot only check the officer's body camera, but several dozen bystander's cell phones to view the indiscretions of our police force. Those, once revered and honored individuals, have now become the object of harrassment and righteous indignation - at least by a portion of our society.

How can a person perform their duties if they are in fear of their job, or worse, every time they answer a call? Well the solution in Philadelphia is simply to stay at the station, the donut shop, or wherever you can lay low for a shift. While crime get's worse, police get more protective of their own jobs. Who would blame them?

One answer that is now being tried in places like Sharpstown, TX , Foley MN, and Oakland, CA, is privatization. Privatization achieves three important goals for a municipality: 1. A fixed budget for police services. 2. Reduced liability for police actions. 3. A better run and more efficient police force.

In an article by Mason Mahon, in 71 Republic November 20, 2017, Director of Operations James Alexander is quoted as saying, "The S.E.A.L. program reduced crime by 61%." He went on to state that, "Burglaries are down 32%." Author Mahon explains later on his article that these results may be attributed to "simply keeping the customer." In other words, the private police force has to measure up to crime reduction goals not imposed on public forces.

The study can be found here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0kkOiAWUCUGdk82R1JuSTV2dU0/view

In an article by Nate Berg for Citylab, October 21, 2011, he wrote that the city of Oakland, CA got four private guards for the cost of one police officer. There are many other citations supporting the reductions in cost in employing a private force. With reduction in crimes and reductions of cost apparent, what keeps cities like Philadelphia from employing a private force?

The answer is that private forces are restricted in the services they perform. For example, in the Berg article cited above, he states that they "can't perform investigations or traffic stops." However, local laws and ordinances are the jurisdiction of local and state government. When the Philadelphia representative, whose office is mentioned above, tried to introduce legislature in Harrisburg to force Philadelphia Police to respond to 9-1-1 calls his bill never made it to session.

With that in mind cities, like Philadelphia, may be slow to change. We can't ignore the elevating crisis of crime in our major cities. During the weekend of August 5, 2019, the City of Chicago had it's worse gun violence in history resulting in seven dead and fifty-two wounded.

With statistics like that I believe it's time we began the process of designing and creating a better police force. While privatization may not be for every city and burg in the United States, it makes sense for those embattled cities like Philadelphia. It makes fiscal sense as well as promises improvement in crime figures.

Realities of society today is that a good portion of urban dwellers consider the police suspect. They fear for their own lives and the lives of their families and friends. By privatizing the police, corporations can take ownership and responsibility for protection of those who are most endangered.

The whole idea simply makes sense. Why isn't it being considered in Harrisburg today?

Bruce G. Bennett